Comparing say… a grouping of counties from Alabama with the Shenandoah Valley

I certainly believe that each area, no matter whether it be in Virginia, Alabama, Tennessee, North Carolina or in any of the states that made up the Confederacy, should be examined based on distinctive differences (demographics, slave population, etc.), taking each county and/or area, one at a time.

So far, I’ve just focused on the Shenandoah Valley. However, with the thought of extending this examination, I thought that I would find some interesting numbers to work with in Alabama. For starters, I found this an interesting item for consideration (the full text of which is available through http://www.swannco.net/1st_Ala_Cav/1sthurst.html) …

“Consider Alabama, the only state for which I have the figures handy. A Deep South state, the location of the first capitol of the Confederacy, yet 23 counties voted the ‘Cooperationist’ ticket. In Winston County, not a single vote was cast for secession. In the 23 loyalist counties, the vote was 21,665 to 12,042. However, the plantation states wielded the power, and in the slave-holding plantation counties, 24,865 voted to secede and 6,965 voted to remain. The totals for the state were 28,630 to remain in the Union and 36,907 for secession. Barbour, Bibb, Butler, Henry, Lowndes, Marengo, Pike and Russell Counties tallied no Cooperationist votes. Thus, 43.7% of the voters of the ostensibly solid Confederate state voted to remain within the Union.”

As for the Southern Loyalist Claims for the above-listed counties of Barbour (0), Bibb (11), Butler (3), Henry (0), Lowndes (0), Marengo (0), Pike (0) and Russell (2), they only totaled 16. By comparison, but still within the state of Alabama, I looked at St. Clair County and all the counties surrounding it. I don’t have the referendum numbers handy, but while there were sixteen total claims in the eight counties mentioned above, in St. Clair County alone there were sixteen who applied for Unionist claims. Meanwhile in the counties that border St. Clair… Etowah (4), Calhoun (1), Talladega (0), Shelby (23), Jefferson (76) and Blount (14) account for a total of 118 Southern Loyalist Claims (including St. Clair, that makes for a total of 134 for that small block of counties in the northeast/central part of Alabama). I’d be curious to see what these people had to say about the referendum vote in their respective counties, not to mention how the referendum vote played-out in each of these counties.

Yes, the vote in Alabama was close and did not always follow the assumed pattern of slaveowner-for-secession/non-slaveowner-for-union. There were 54 pro-secession and 46 pro-union delegates elected for the convention. The final vote was 61-39 in favor of secession. It should be noted that this was before Lincoln’s call for 75,000 troops to invade the South. If that issue had been in the mix the vote would have been far greater in favor of secession.

The Feds controlled North Alabama from 1862 to the end of the war but were only able to raise one regiment of cavalry. The Confederates raised at least 75 regiments of infantry and cavalry in Alabama.

75 to 1.

Georgia was also close. The popular vote separated by only a few thousand votes.

The initial test vote in the secession convention was 166-130 in favor of secession. The final vote 208-89.

The Confederates raised over 80 regiments in Georgia. The Federals one small battalion (about 200 men).

Lincoln’s call for 75,000 troops transformed a lot of ‘Union men’ into ‘Rebels.’

Even so, the Southern Loyalists Claims were not until well after the war, showing the fact that, despite life after Lincoln’s call for troops, Unionism was still very real in the South (although a few claimants were filing claims just to get money and weren’t Unionists at all. In my experience in closely examining one county, I ran into one example of this).

I’m well aware of the impact that Lincoln’s call for troops had in Virginia. Staunton, Virginia, in the Shenandoah Valley, had a large number of Unionists who even condemned S.C. for seceding. Opinions swayed after the call, but not all.

Also, citing the number of regiments raised for the Confederacy or not raised in support of the Union doesn’t support your position on this matter, nor is it proof of absolute loyalties. As in the case of evaluating counties and the vote within the respective counties on a one-by-one basis, so too do people need to look hard at the enlistments of soldiers. So what if 150 men enlisted in a company in 1861 – it doesn’t prove that those who enlisted were loyal… or even wanted to enlist. Various factors played-into the reasons for enlistment. What’s more interesting, however, is when figuring out what brought men into the ranks after 1861. Why, for example, did men wait until the spring of 1862, late 1863 and the spring of 1864? It was no coincidence that many enlisted (and were conscripted, though records aren’t always clear on the matter) only because of the passage of the Confederate conscript acts, not to mention that enlistments on paper were not always enlistments. Conscription was well-masked in the enlistment records. Sometimes it is obvious, but many times it is not. Also, I’ve already mentioned it before, but the first real conscription act, before those of 62, 63 and 64, was made in Virginia in the summer of 1861 when the militia was called into service. I’ve found many men who, after the militia disbanded, did not join regular field units, but instead, went home.

You keep raising these points and you attempt to counter what I post, yet you hardly present evidence in support of your argument. Furthermore, as in the case of saying things like “75-1,” it is clear that you continue to look at raw numbers and take them at face value. There are deeper issues and you are not addressing them, or simply, because you can’t come to grips with facts that hard evidence brings to light, you don’t want to accept them as possibilities. This is the very reason why I continue to address Civil War memory.